Legal Opinion
Rosenthal v. Celanese Corp. of America
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided April 16, 1940No. 6PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
NIELDS, District Judge.
The action charges infringement of two patents issued to plaintiff. They are: No. 1,617,544 entitled “Manufacture and Treatment of Threads” issued February 15, 1927. Claim 4 alone is in issue. No. 1,620,233 entitled “Process of Making Thread” issued March 8, 1927, Qaims 2 to 5 and 7 to 11 are in issue.
The defenses are invalidity and noninfringement. Invalidity is asserted for want of invention over the prior art and by reason of anticipation by the prior art: for failure to comply with Sec. 4888, R.S., 35 U.S.C.A. § 33, as to disclosure and because they disclose…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Schriber-Schroth Co. v. Cleveland Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Standard Oil Development Co. v. James B. Berry Sons Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1937
- Dooley Improvements, Inc. v. Motor Improvements, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1937
3Cited by2 opinions
- Rosenthal v. Celanese Corp. of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1943
- Rosenthal v. Celanese Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1942